Vivek Saxena v. State of U.P. and another) came up for admission on

cognizance/summoning order dated 29-09-2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, under sections 376, 511, 354-ka, 506, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the entire proceeding of Case No. 7253 of 2022-(State Vs. Vivek Saxena), as as Charge Sheet dated 09-08-2022 including cognizance/summoning order dated 29-09-2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, under sections 376, 511, 354-ka, 506, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the present application under section 528 B.N.S.S., otherwise the Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.And/or may pass such other or further order or direction, protecting the interests of the Applicant, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.."

4. Applicant-Pragya Tewari, who is a named as well as charge sheeted accused and has been summoned by court below, has now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and stay the further proceedings of Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the impugned Charge Sheet dated 09.08.2022 in Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad, as well as impugned cognizance order dated 29.09.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad in the aforesaid case and/or pass such other and further order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise Applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

5. Criminal Misc. Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 14955 of 2025 (Vivek Saxena Vs. State of U.P. and another) came up for admission on 07.05.2025 and this Court passed the following order: "Heard Mr. Yatish Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record. At the very outset, the learned counsel for applicants contends that co- accused has already approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5218 of 2023, (PRAGYA TEWARI vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER), which is already pending before this Court. In view of above, connect aforesaid application along with this application. Matter shall re-appear as fresh on 14.5.2025 along with connected matter. When the matter is listed next the details of both the applications shall be published in the cause list. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 "

6. In view of above order dated 07.05.2025 both the applications stood connected and have now come up together before this Court for admission.

7. At the very outset, the learned counsel for applicant submits that during the pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 07.06.2024 in respect of applicant Vivek Saxena and Aradhya Gupta. The copy of the compromise deed has been brought on record as Annexure 6 to the affidavit filed in support of application filed by accused/applicant Vivek Saxena. Thereafter, the said compromise filed before court below supported by separate affidavit of applicant Vivek Saxena and first informant Aradhya Gupta.

8. Similarly in the case of Pragya Tiwari, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 06.07.2023, copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed in the application filed by accused-Pragya Tewari. Thereafter, aforementioned compromise was also filed before court below by means of application dated 06.07.2023 alongwith separate affidavits of accused applicant as well as first informant.

9. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during the pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing. Subsequently, the said compromise has been filed before court below duly supported by the affidavit of first informant and accused/applicant. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicants submit that the dispute between the parties is a purely private dispute and not a crime against society. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the chances of conviction of accused/applicants are now not only remote but also bleak. As such no useful purpose shall be severed in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant. It is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicants that the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case are liable to be quashed by this Court in view of the compromise entered into by the parties.

10. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. representing State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed this application. Learned A.G.A. submits that applicants are facing trial under Section 376 I.P.C. also. In view of the injunction issued by the Apex Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR OnLine 2019 SC 1716, that there can be no compromise in matters of rape and sexual assault. The compromise entered into by the parties is meaningless inasmuch as the criminal prosecution of applicants can not be terminated on the basis of compromise so entered into by the parties. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that no interference is warranted by the Court in present applications. Consequently, both the applications are liable to be dismissed by this Court.

11. On the other hand, Mr. Dileep Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 does not oppose this application. He submits that he has received instructions not to oppose the present application.

12. Be that as it may, having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Dileep Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record this Court finds that in view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Rampal (supra), as noted herein above, the impugned criminal proceedings cannot be terminated in the light of the compromise entered into by the parties. As such the compromise entered into by the parties is misconceived, In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present applications.

13. As a result, both the applications fail and are liable to be dismissed.

14. They are accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 YK YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

cognizance/summoning order dated 29-09-2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, under sections 376, 511, 354-ka, 506, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the entire proceeding of Case No. 7253 of 2022-(State Vs. Vivek Saxena), as as Charge Sheet dated 09-08-2022 including cognizance/summoning order dated 29-09-2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, under sections 376, 511, 354-ka, 506, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the present application under section 528 B.N.S.S., otherwise the Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.And/or may pass such other or further order or direction, protecting the interests of the Applicant, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.."

4. Applicant-Pragya Tewari, who is a named as well as charge sheeted accused and has been summoned by court below, has now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and stay the further proceedings of Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the impugned Charge Sheet dated 09.08.2022 in Case No. 7253 of 2022 (State Vs. Pragya Tiwari) arising out of Case Crime No. 1178 of 2019, Under Section-376, 511, 354A, 506, 328, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station-Sihani Gate, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad, as well as impugned cognizance order dated 29.09.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3rd, Ghaziabad in the aforesaid case and/or pass such other and further order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise Applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

5. Criminal Misc. Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 14955 of 2025 (Vivek Saxena Vs. State of U.P. and another) came up for admission on 07.05.2025 and this Court passed the following order: "Heard Mr. Yatish Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record. At the very outset, the learned counsel for applicants contends that co- accused has already approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5218 of 2023, (PRAGYA TEWARI vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER), which is already pending before this Court. In view of above, connect aforesaid application along with this application. Matter shall re-appear as fresh on 14.5.2025 along with connected matter. When the matter is listed next the details of both the applications shall be published in the cause list. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 "

6. In view of above order dated 07.05.2025 both the applications stood connected and have now come up together before this Court for admission.

7. At the very outset, the learned counsel for applicant submits that during the pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 07.06.2024 in respect of applicant Vivek Saxena and Aradhya Gupta. The copy of the compromise deed has been brought on record as Annexure 6 to the affidavit filed in support of application filed by accused/applicant Vivek Saxena. Thereafter, the said compromise filed before court below supported by separate affidavit of applicant Vivek Saxena and first informant Aradhya Gupta.

8. Similarly in the case of Pragya Tiwari, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 06.07.2023, copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed in the application filed by accused-Pragya Tewari. Thereafter, aforementioned compromise was also filed before court below by means of application dated 06.07.2023 alongwith separate affidavits of accused applicant as well as first informant.

9. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during the pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties were reduced in writing. Subsequently, the said compromise has been filed before court below duly supported by the affidavit of first informant and accused/applicant. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicants submit that the dispute between the parties is a purely private dispute and not a crime against society. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the chances of conviction of accused/applicants are now not only remote but also bleak. As such no useful purpose shall be severed in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant. It is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicants that the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case are liable to be quashed by this Court in view of the compromise entered into by the parties.

10. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. representing State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed this application. Learned A.G.A. submits that applicants are facing trial under Section 376 I.P.C. also. In view of the injunction issued by the Apex Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR OnLine 2019 SC 1716, that there can be no compromise in matters of rape and sexual assault. The compromise entered into by the parties is meaningless inasmuch as the criminal prosecution of applicants can not be terminated on the basis of compromise so entered into by the parties. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that no interference is warranted by the Court in present applications. Consequently, both the applications are liable to be dismissed by this Court.

11. On the other hand, Mr. Dileep Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 does not oppose this application. He submits that he has received instructions not to oppose the present application.

12. Be that as it may, having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Dileep Kumar Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record this Court finds that in view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Rampal (supra), as noted herein above, the impugned criminal proceedings cannot be terminated in the light of the compromise entered into by the parties. As such the compromise entered into by the parties is misconceived, In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present applications.

13. As a result, both the applications fail and are liable to be dismissed.

14. They are accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 YK YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad